The funny thing is, the Republican talking heads will parrot this point over and over on legitimate news shows (i.e., not Fox) and yet NOT ONE of the so-called journalists will whip out this chart and call them on their bullshiat. Seriously, I'd like to see some conservative go on CNN or NBC and say "this is the largest tax increase in history" and have the moderator/interviewer pull up this chart and say, "So what you're doing here is lying, right?"

Several months ago, the argument centered around whether the ACA was or was not a tax.Today, we apparently agree it is a tax, but are questioning if it's the biggest tax increase ever or just in the top 10.

It sounds to me like Republicans have won, and Democrats haven't even noticed yet. The battle is for the argument; the war is for the framing of it.

If only the Republican nominee hadn't already imposed a very similar "tax" on the state he governated.

Of course. I'm not suggesting that Limbaugh is correct here (or that Romney isn't a hypocrite). I'm simply stating that they've successfully framed the debate so that even if they "lose" the argument, they win overall.

If I ask if you are "the world's cruelest monster" or "just a jerk", and you successfully prove using empirical evidence that you are not "the world's cruelest monster," you may have defeated my argument. But did you "win?"

Forty six seconds in. That's what kills Romney. He doesn't want to call it an individual mandate, so... "now that we have these products available for you, we want EVERYBODY to get insurance and you have responsibility of having insurance and we're going to MANDATE that you have insurance"!!!

Mr. Coffee Nerves:Much like Eisenhower the idea that Reagan could survive the weapons-grade derp of a GOP primary today is ludicrous.

"Reagan? The divorced Hollyweird actor who ducked WWII and was the president of a union?"

probably could leave out your third point. shirking military duty and using connections to get a shiat load of deferments during Vietnam is kind of the current boomer generation crop of republican's thing.

For those of you who do not remember that era, before Reagan took office, the top tax rate was 70%. When he left office, it was 28%.Yes, he (and congress) did increase taxes, after he (and congress) slashed taxes in 1981 and 1986. But the increases were less about increasing rates and more about closing loopholes.The biggest increase in tax was agreed upon as a package of taxes (which passed) and budget cuts (which were agreed to, and never materialized).

Dr. Whoof:The funny thing is, the Republican talking heads will parrot this point over and over on legitimate news shows (i.e., not Fox) and yet NOT ONE of the so-called journalists will whip out this chart and call them on their bullshiat. Seriously, I'd like to see some conservative go on CNN or NBC and say "this is the largest tax increase in history" and have the moderator/interviewer pull up this chart and say, "So what you're doing here is lying, right?"

But it won't happen. And that's why we can't have nice things.

I'm not sure that i'll stick with the Aaron Sorkin but it could probably use an episode about charts and how they work.

bloatboy:For those of you who do not remember that era, before Reagan took office, the top tax rate was 70%. When he left office, it was 28%.Yes, he (and congress) did increase taxes, after he (and congress) slashed taxes in 1981 and 1986. But the increases were less about increasing rates and more about closing loopholes.The biggest increase in tax was agreed upon as a package of taxes (which passed) and budget cuts (which were agreed to, and never materialized).

Well, in that case, we have to consider that Obama also cut a lot of taxes (through the stimulus program). Not sure how they line up against ACA taxes, however. Although if you credit him the tax cut extension I have a feeling it'd end up that he "cut taxes."

Marcus Aurelius:It's the most avoidable tax in history. Just get yourself some health insurance, and you're all set.

Reminds me of the tea tards who complained about the toll increases here on the Illinois toll roads. After pointing out to these people that it was rather easy to avoid the tolls by not driving on the toll roads, the typical response was "but the toll roads are the quickest, easiest way for me to get where I need to go."

bloatboy:For those of you who do not remember that era, before Reagan took office, the top tax rate was 70%. When he left office, it was 28%.Yes, he (and congress) did increase taxes, after he (and congress) slashed taxes in 1981 and 1986. But the increases were less about increasing rates and more about closing loopholes.The biggest increase in tax was agreed upon as a package of taxes (which passed) and budget cuts (which were agreed to, and never materialized).

Yes, I remember Reagan. He's the guy ushered in the current age of deficit spending, when he wasn't negotiating with terrorists or selling weapons to fund illegal wars.

Reagan was a stain on this nation. That he's worshipped today is an embarrassment.

bloatboy:For those of you who do not remember that era, before Reagan took office, the top tax rate was 70%. When he left office, it was 28%.Yes, he (and congress) did increase taxes, after he (and congress) slashed taxes in 1981 and 1986. But the increases were less about increasing rates and more about closing loopholes.The biggest increase in tax was agreed upon as a package of taxes (which passed) and budget cuts (which were agreed to, and never materialized).

Please note that it was the marginal tax rate.

Reagan drastically cut taxes in 1981, only to raise them in 1982 because he realized he had made a mistake. The rich benefited the most during his years in office, of course, and the gap between rich and poor widened as a result.

"It's the biggest tax increase in history. Granted, it's almost as big as Bush '90 and Clinton '93, but nowhere near as massive as Reagan may saliva and urine be upon him '82. Yes, THAT Reagan may saliva and urine be upon him, the one from the stained-glass window on your trailer

Budhisatva:Several months ago, the argument centered around whether the ACA was or was not a tax.Today, we apparently agree it is a tax, but are questioning if it's the biggest tax increase ever or just in the top 10.

It sounds to me like Republicans have won, and Democrats haven't even noticed yet. The battle is for the argument; the war is for the framing of it.

I thought the argument centered around whether it was the correct, moral thing to do, making sure Americans had access to health care.

I guess to some people, it's about their Lord and Savior, money. You can argue about long term cost benefits and taxes all you want. I will continue to be happy we passed legislation that allows me to have health care coverage.

Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.Homer: Oh, how does it work?Lisa: It doesn't work.Homer: Uh-huh.Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.Homer: Uh-huh.Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

Mr. Coffee Nerves:Much like Eisenhower the idea that Reagan could survive the weapons-grade derp of a GOP primary today is ludicrous.

"Reagan? The divorced Hollyweird actor who ducked WWII and was the president of a union?"

While Reagan certainly was no WWII hero like other prominent actors (e.g., Jimmy Stewart basically had to beg to see active duty and served with distinction), he did provide a valuable service by making wartime movies that helped the war effort.

Moopy Mac:While Reagan certainly was no WWII hero like other prominent actors (e.g., Jimmy Stewart basically had to beg to see active duty and served with distinction), he did provide a valuable service by making wartime movies that helped the war effort.

He produced a service. Whether it was valuable or not is a matter of debate.

He could have joined up and toured with the USO. He could have joined up and gone into one of the film units like Capra and a lot of others did. As it stands, he never left the country, never put himself in any real danger, and then, later in life, liked to wax rhapsodic about his adventures in Europe during the war, adventures he never actually had.

Budhisatva:someonelse: Budhisatva: It sounds to me like Republicans have won,

If only the Republican nominee hadn't already imposed a very similar "tax" on the state he governated.

Of course. I'm not suggesting that Limbaugh is correct here (or that Romney isn't a hypocrite). I'm simply stating that they've successfully framed the debate so that even if they "lose" the argument, they win overall.

If I ask if you are "the world's cruelest monster" or "just a jerk", and you successfully prove using empirical evidence that you are not "the world's cruelest monster," you may have defeated my argument. But did you "win?"

Sadly... this. I don't know how many times I've practically wanted to scream at the screen (TV or computer) after seeing this. Do the Democrats have no concept what so ever of this? They must not, because they let it happen Every. Single. God. Damn. Time.

Witness... allowing the teabaggers to name the ACA "Obamacare" in the first place. If you let someone else control the language, you might as well give up because you've already lost the debate.

erik-k:Witness... allowing the teabaggers to name the ACA "Obamacare" in the first place. If you let someone else control the language, you might as well give up because you've already lost the debate.

FlashHarry:erik-k: Witness... allowing the teabaggers to name the ACA "Obamacare" in the first place. If you let someone else control the language, you might as well give up because you've already lost the debate.

i have a feeling that they'll come to regret calling it obamacare.

I pretty much refuse to call it anything but Obamacare anymore. And I also have started exclusively calling it the "shared responsibility payment" now that the language in the law saying that everyone must hold health insurance has been rendered ceremonial.

erik-k:Budhisatva: someonelse: Budhisatva: It sounds to me like Republicans have won,

If only the Republican nominee hadn't already imposed a very similar "tax" on the state he governated.

Of course. I'm not suggesting that Limbaugh is correct here (or that Romney isn't a hypocrite). I'm simply stating that they've successfully framed the debate so that even if they "lose" the argument, they win overall.

If I ask if you are "the world's cruelest monster" or "just a jerk", and you successfully prove using empirical evidence that you are not "the world's cruelest monster," you may have defeated my argument. But did you "win?"

Sadly... this. I don't know how many times I've practically wanted to scream at the screen (TV or computer) after seeing this. Do the Democrats have no concept what so ever of this? They must not, because they let it happen Every. Single. God. Damn. Time.

Witness... allowing the teabaggers to name the ACA "Obamacare" in the first place. If you let someone else control the language, you might as well give up because you've already lost the debate.

Who "allowed" the teabaggers to name it anything? When you have a 24hr TV "news" channel that repeats something over and over, backed up by several major newspapers and radio stations owned by the same guy, how exactly do you stop it?

You Are All Sheepand how much is that health insurance now? I know our rates jumped 25% last year in waiting for this.

That's what's known as insurance companies farking you over.

I wonder how many claims had to be denied so that the CEO of United Healthcare could make hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years? Hmm..

What's sad is that the ACA is the most we could get in this farked up country. If politicians weren't so in the pockets of the corporations and people so brainwashed by right wing propaganda, we'd have single payer insurance.

patrick767:You Are All Sheepand how much is that health insurance now? I know our rates jumped 25% last year in waiting for this.

That's what's known as insurance companies farking you over.

I wonder how many claims had to be denied so that the CEO of United Healthcare could make hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years? Hmm..

What's sad is that the ACA is the most we could get in this farked up country. If politicians weren't so in the pockets of the corporations and people so brainwashed by right wing propaganda, we'd have single payer insurance.

Could not agree more, but you deal with the political reality you have, not the one you want. If we have to use private insurance to pay for health care for a while - say until most of the TeaTards are dead/stop voting - at least we can level the playing field a bit.